SCOTUS says police need a warrant to get your cell phone tower data

[DanRydell 799]

5-4 with Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor in the majority. Opinion here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-402_h315.pdf

The police can no longer track your location/movements by tracking what cell towers your cell phone is connecting to without first obtaining a warrant.

TBD whether this will be a significant revision of the third party doctrine or not. Roberts says the ruling is limited to technology that creates "a detailed chronicle of a person’s physical presence". But there will definitely be attempts to extend the idea that the information you provide to a third party can be so invasive that it requires a warrant to other tech.

[Fozzz 152]

Wasn't Gorsuch supposed to have a Scalia-like civil liberties streak in him? lmao

[Captainant 27442]

I think the crux of the prevailing ruling is that the data that is collected about you is necessary to using the service, which the justices agree is necessary to modern life. Definitely a step in the right direction. It is concerning that each of the four conservative justices each filed their own dissent though. We're going to have a very big-brother and corporate friendly SCOTUS for the next couple decades.

[LongestHorn 759]

Conservatives want judges that create more big brother.  They're not happy with Roberts siding with libruls.

[TwiceHorn 31263]

49 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I think the crux of the prevailing ruling is that the data that is collected about you is necessary to using the service, which the justices agree is necessary to modern life. Definitely a step in the right direction. It is concerning that each of the four conservative justices each filed their own dissent though. We're going to have a very big-brother and corporate friendly SCOTUS for the next couple decades.

Roberts no longer qualifies as conservative?

[Fozzz 152]

Roberts is definitely a shithead reactionary.  Remember when he opened the floodgates for racist Republicans to disenfranchise black voters by gutting the VRA?  

[DanRydell 799]

Orin Kerr, one of the most prominent Fourth Amendment and Tech Law scholars, is doing a sorta FAQ rundown on the ruling.

https://reason.com/volokh/2018/06/22/first-thoughts-on-carpenter-v-united-sta

[bernorange 8348]

Yeah, well, I don't think it's going to make a shit in actual practice:

http://www.surlyhorns.com/board/index.php?/topic/1374-surveillance-state-vs-freedom-of-travel-right-to-privacy/&do=findComment&comment=144430

 

[TwiceHorn 31263]

11 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Roberts is definitely a shithead reactionary.  Remember when he opened the floodgates for racist Republicans to disenfranchise black voters by gutting the VRA?  

But Obamacare!

[HRSchenker 2259]

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

Wasn't Gorsuch supposed to have a Scalia-like civil liberties streak in him? lmao

Gorsuch joins Thomas more than Scalia ever did. I doubt Gorsuch would have joined Scalia in Maryland v King.